Let me start by saying this. I do not support the current policy 705 as it is written. I have rewritten the policy and submitted a draft of my rewrite to the board for their consideration, and I have gotten good feedback from the board about my rewrite.

I look forward to working with them to get this policy right.

With all of that said, I do support allowing staff to carry concealed weapons and to be trained to respond to an active-shooter situation within our schools. This however, cannot be the only measure taken to strengthen the security of our schools. It must be part of a multilayered plan.

That plan should include some of the technology discussed at previous school board meetings, reviewing access to the buildings, as well as some sort of mental heath support for our students and staff.

I do not support turning our teachers into security guards but, allowing them to defend themselves and their students with a gun — if they are faced with a gun — is not that outlandish. I cannot speak for the school board, but I think that is what they are looking to do as well. I think they are just trying to give the staff of the district a way to defend themselves in the worst-case scenario, and end that situation as quickly as possible.

The most common arguments against allowing staff to carry are:

• Teachers are not police officers and aren’t trained to handle guns. The training they will go through is nothing compared to the months of training that a police officer would go through.

Both of those things are true. Police officers in Pennsylvania are required to go through the Act 120 program, which is typically a six-month, full-time class. In those six months they go through everything from traffic citation to criminal cases. Carrying a weapon for defense of themselves and their students doesn’t require all that training on such broad subjects.

Specific training on situations they could be faced with as staff members at the school is the type of training that should be done. This is a voluntary program. The staff who I foresee volunteering for this program already have experience with guns. I cannot see someone who has never handled a gun requesting to be a part of this program.

• Another one I keep hearing is: They don’t even allow guns in our prisons.

This is partially true. Prison guards do have direct access to pepper spray and some sort of electric stunning devices. However, most prisons do have an armory on site where they store different types of weapons and firearms. Inmates do not have access to guns, “but they make all kind of weapons.”

True, but they don’t make firearms. When someone is admitted into a prison, they go through a very invasive search. Metal detectors are used, they are strip-searched, and subject to body cavity searches to ensure they don’t bring in anything they shouldn’t. Would you suggest we subject our students to such searches? I didn’t think so. So, let’s stop making this comparison.

Stop focusing on the gun and look at the big picture. A gun is a tool. On a police officer’s belt there are multiple tools. The most important one is their radio. Communication is the most important tool on that belt. Which is why I also say we need to add a mental health component to this plan. Allowing staff to carry is not the solution, but it should be part of the plan.

Respectfully,

Joshua Grim Sr.

Tamaqua resident